Clott v. Greyhound Lines, Inc., 7010DC495
Decision Date | 18 November 1970 |
Docket Number | No. 7010DC495,7010DC495 |
Citation | 177 S.E.2d 438,9 N.C.App. 604 |
Parties | Raymond CLOTT v. GREYHOUND LINES, INC. |
Court | North Carolina Court of Appeals |
Boyce, Mitchell, Burns & Smith, by Robert E. Smith, Raleigh, for plaintiff-appellant.
Teague, Johnson, Patterson, Dilthey & Clay, by I. Edward Johnson, Raleigh, for defendant-appellee.
Plaintiff's evidence, in addition to his own testimony, consisted of the adverse examinations of three employees of defendant: A. H. Howell, driver of the bus; Roy Wells, Superintendent of the Raleigh Division of Greyhound; and Walter J. Rackley, a part-time dispatcher relief for Greyhound who was on duty on the date in question. Plaintiff testified that he bought a ticket in Bushnell, Florida, with the final destination to be New York, New York, via Greyhound bus. He changed busses in Jacksonville, Florida, and carried the grip with him on the bus when he boarded in Jacksonville. He testified that he was not allowed to check the bag at that time because his bus was scheduled to depart in five minutes, and all baggage had to be checked at least 20 minutes before the schedules departure time.
The bag had in it an envelope containing $2,209 in cash; a Leica camera; Rolex watch; Hamilton watch; three bottles of perfume--Arpege, Alma and Joy; two electric razors; and his seaman's papers. Plaintiff testified that he got on the last seat 'on top in the scenic cruiser, and it had a receding wall about this wide here between the seat and the motor wall, and I got on my knees and dropped the bag behind there; all the way.' When the bus arrived in Columbia, South Carolina, an announcement of a stopover was made, but plaintiff paid no attention because he was 'half asleep.' The other passengers got off for breakfast. Plaintiff testified that later another announcement was made that the bus would be delayed for about 20 minutes and if anyone wanted coffee to go get it. Plaintiff got off the bus and went in to get coffee and doughnuts, and while he was walking out with the doughnuts, he saw the bus pulling out. He was the only passenger who had left the bus at the second announcement. Plaintiff then went to the dispatcher and Plaintiff further testified that when he arrived in Raleigh later the same day, he went to the dispatcher, whose name he thought was Rackley, and asked for his bag. The dispatcher gave him his hat but said, as to the bag, Plaintiff continued his trip to New York and in May 1967 received a letter from Greyhound advising that they had located the bag in Chamblee, Georgia. When the bag was returned to plaintiff,
Mr. Howell, the driver, testified that when he arrived in Raleigh he was notified that a passenger had been left in Columbia and was asked to get his baggage and bring it to the dispatcher's office.
Mr. Wells, the Superintendent, testified that he was not in Raleigh that day but recalled that Mr. Rackley later told him he had received a message from Columbia concerning lost baggage containing valuables; that he contacted the driver immediately upon the arrival of the bus in Raleigh and asked him to remove the bag from the bus and that the driver did deliver the bag to Mr. Rackley, and it was placed in the dispatcher's office. Mr. Rackley had also told this witness that he was unable to locate the bag when plaintiff arrived. The dispatcher's office is small with one exit door opening to the outside of the terminal onto the loading platform.
Mr. Rackley testified that he remembered receiving a message from Columbia. Mr. Rackley further testified as follows:
...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Beck v. Carolina Power and Light Co.
...Carolina's New Products Liability Act: A Critical Analysis, 16 Wake For.L.Rev. 171, 183-84 (1980). 1 In Clott v. Greyhound Lines, 9 N.C.App. 604, 609, 177 S.E.2d 438, 441 (1970), rev'd on other grounds, 278 N.C. 378, 180 S.E.2d 102 (1971), Judge Morris, now Chief Judge, stated that gross ne......
-
Cole v. Duke Power Co.
...something less than wilful and wanton conduct. See Smith v. Stepp, 257 N.C. 422, 125 S.E.2d 903 (1962); see also Clott v. Greyhound Lines, 9 N.C. App. 604, 177 S.E.2d 438 (1970), rev'd on other grounds, 278 N.C. 378, 180 S.E.2d 102 (1971). Using this definition, we find that there is eviden......
-
Horne v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp.
...is held liable only for gross negligence, being something less than willful and wanton conduct. See Clott v. Greyhound Lines, Inc., 9 N.C.App. 604, 609, 177 S.E.2d 438, 441 (1970), rev'd on other grounds, 278 N.C. 378, 180 S.E.2d 102 Neither the North Carolina Wrongful Death Act nor the law......
-
Baker v. Moorefield, COA01-1594.
... ... of fact, the trial court concluded the "true boundary lines of the [Bakers' Property]" did not run 7½ degrees South, ... ...